DOCSLIB.ORG

V. Case 2:10-Cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
V. Case 2:10-Cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page I 1 ,, II Case 2:10-cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page 1 of 55 PageID: <pageID> FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY THADDEUS JAMES THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. SHANTA Y BRAME ADAMS, et al., Civil Action No. 10-5026 (DRD) Defendants. RONALD NASH, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 10-2113 (DRD) CHRIS CHRISTIE et al., OPINION Defendants. APPLIES TO BOTH ACTIONS Appearances: Lawrence S. Lustberg, Esq., Gibbons P.C. 1 Gateway Center, Newark, New Jersey 07102 for Thaddeus James Thomas, Plaintiff Michael R. Yellin, Esq., Cole, Schotz, Meisel, Forman & Leonard, P.A. Court Plaza North, 25 Main Street, Hackensack, New Jersey 07601 for Ronald Nash, Plaintiff David L. Dacosta and Daniel M. Vannella, Esqs., Office of the New Jersey Attorney General Department of Law & Public Safety and R.J. Hughes Justice Complex, 25 Market Street, Trenton, New Jersey 08625 for Defendants Christopher J. Christie, Paula T. Dow, Gary M. Lanigan, Jennifer Velez, John Main, Jonathan Poag, Merrill Main, Shantay Braim Adams and Jackie Ottino Case 2:10-cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page 2 of 55 PageID: <pageID> Debevoise, Senior District Judge: Moving to dismiss Plaintiffs claims, pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Defendants essentially maintain that Plaintiffs failed to state a plausible claim against them simply because Defendants are high-ranking supervising officials, and Plaintiffs' facts lack the particularities of Defendants' decision-making process and actions. This Court disagrees and will deny Defendants' motions, in part, and grant them in part. I. BACKGROUND Both Plaintiffs are civilly committed sexually violent predators ("SVPs") confined under the New Jersey Sexually Violent Predator Act ("NJSVPA"), N.J. Stat. Ann.§ 30:4-27.24. Both are now housed at the Special Treatment Unit ("STU") of the East Jersey State Prison ("EJSP"). See County of Hudson v. State Dep't of Corr., 2009 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1188, at *2 and n.2 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Apr. 22, 2009). 1 Prior to being confined at the EJSP, the SVPs, Plaintiffs included, were confined at a Hudson County facility: at Kearny. See id. at *2-4. Since the events underlying the SVPs' transfer from Kearny to the EJSP STU are relevant to the issues at bar and have already been adjudicated in the state courts, with the DOC having had a full and fair opportunity to present its facts with regard to the DOC's obligation to find- and its search for- a transferee facility, it appears warranted to replicate the state courts' findings in detail: 1 "In 1998, the Legislature enacted the [NJSVPA], which authorized the involuntary civil commitment of persons found to be [SVPs]. The [NJSVPA] define[d an SVP] as 'a person who has been convicted, adjudicated delinquent or found not guilty by reason of insanity for commission of a sexually violent offense, or has been charged with a sexually violent offense but found to be incompetent to stand trial, and suffers from a mental abnormality ... that makes the person likely to engage in acts of sexual violence if not confined ... for ... treatment.' The [NJSVPA] placed with the Department of Corrections ('DOC') the responsibility of operating a facility for 'the custody, care and treatment' of SVPs." County of Hudson, 2009 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1188, at *2 and n.2 (citations omitted, footnote incorporated). Page 2 of 55 I il II Case 2:10-cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page 3 of 55 PageID: <pageID> In April1999, the .DOC designated the Kearny facility, which at the time housed 311 minimum security inmates, as the only available site for the temporary housing of SVPs. A few months later, the County of Hudson ... obtained an order that required the DOC to show cause why ... the DOC [should not be] enjoined from designating the Kearny facility as a location for the housing of SVPs. The trial court ... entered a judgment ... in favor of the County [but] stayed execution of the warrant of removal ... until September 29, 2000. On September 22, 2000, one week before the stay expired, Governor Christine Todd Whitman invoked her emergency powers, pursuant to the Disaster Control Act, and entered Executive Order 118. [T]he Kearny facility [was, under the Order,] designated as a facility appropriate for the temporary housing of SVPs by the DOC ... until ... other temporary facilities capable of and appropriate for the housing of all individuals committed pursuant to the [NJSVPA were located] or until a permanent facility capable of accommodating this population [was] constructed and operational. ... On June 1, 2004, the County and the DOC filed a stipulation ... not to challenge Executive Order 118 until December 31, 2006. When that deadline passed - and another year as well - without an indication from the DOC as to when the SVPs would be removed from the Kearny facility, the County filed [another legal action. Eventually, the DOC and County agreed that the DOC would produce] the record ... sufficiently demonstrat[ing] what the DOC has done since 2000. The record ... demonstrate[ d) that the DOC has been active but not forceful- or, at least, not effectual- in finding a ... solution . In August 1998, an architectural firm presented a plan to the DOC for the construction of a new 300-bed special treatment unit. State officials thereafter toured Minnesota's SVP facility, identifying several aspects of that facility that might prove beneficial to the DOC's existing proposal. Consideration was given in September 1998 to building a facility on the grounds of [EJSP] at an estimated cost of$ 20,000,000. Questions arose about the sufficiency of the estimate, followed by objections from the Township of Woodbridge, which commenced litigation and obtained an injunction halting the project. The following month, discussions began in other locations. A site in Maurice River Township was identified as having potential, but was eventually opposed by the township. And, in June 1999, a location in the Borough of Chesilhurst was considered. However, when State officials advised that a public hearing on the subject would be conducted, local residents and officials expressed intense opposition. Little occurred with regard to the creation of a new facility until 2001 when the Department of Treasury requested that the architectural firm update and revise its 1998 study. The firm conducted a series of programming workshops with various officials in an attempt to reach a consensus on the program's needs; its comprehensive plan was presented on February 7, 2002. That plan estimated the cost of the structure at more than $ 65,000,000. The firm also estimated that the 455-bed facility would require twenty-five acres Page 3 of 55 Case 2:10-cv-05026-ES-MAH Document 32 Filed 10/20/14 Page 4 of 55 PageID: <pageID> and estimated the entire cost of the project, including planning, design, construction, permitting and other costs, at more than $ 82,000,000. The plan was viewed as too expensive. 1m. January 2006, the proposal was reconsidered. By that time, the cost estimate had risen to more than$ 114,000,000 and was again deemed too expensive. Meanwhile, the adaptation of existing facilities was also explored. Starting in 2002, each of the DOC's facilities was examined and reviewed for this purpose and each deemed unsuitable for a variety of reasons. The DOC considered its Central Reception and Assignment Facility ("CRAF") in Trenton, determined it required major improvements to all its buildings, as well as a 17,030 square foot extension at a total cost of more than $ 17,000,000, and then realized that utilization of CRAF would give rise to a need to find alternate housing for CRAF's inmates. Utilization of the Mid-State Correctional Facility was complicated by the fact that the facility [was] located on federal property. As part of its realignment and closure of Fort Dix, the federal government imposed upon the property it had transferred to the DOC several conditions, which apparently raised concerns about a reversion of the property should it be used to house SVPs. The DOC also harbored concerns about the facility's size and perimeter security. The grounds of the Albert C. Wagner Youth Correctional Facility in Bordentown consisted of one structure found to be too large (consisting of 846 beds), and other structures found too small. The Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center in Avenel, which is the State's only sex offender prison, was considered. But the proposed facility, if located there, would require subdivision from the remaining population [under the state law], and another location for the prisoners there housed. [In fact, a]ny use of existing correctional facilities would [have] necessarily require[d] the relocation of current inmates, which [would] generate[ an additional] cost to the DOC. The DOC also found problems with Bayside State Prison in Leesburg and Ancora Psychiatric Hospital in Winslow Township [since] Bayside consist[ed] of a 1,221-bed facility, deemed too large for the SVP population, and a farm with open barracks and cottage-type housing units, [was] deemed too insecure for these purposes. Ancora consist[ ed] of two separate housing units, with a total of 350 beds, separated by a walking and open recreation space, [and also was] deemed insecure and unsuitable. The DOC reconsidered CRAF in 2006 [but] Jones Farm, a 282-bed satellite unit of CRAF was rejected as too small. On the other hand, [the EJSP] in Rahway, New Jersey State Prison in Trenton, Northern State Prison in Newark, Riverfront State Prison in Camden, and Edna Mahan Correctional Facility in Clinton, were considered too large.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • As the Parties and This Court Are Intimately Familiar with the Factual
    Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1012 Filed 05/19/08 Page 1 of 10 PageID: <pageID> (Not for Publication) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE ___________________________________ : : IN RE: : Civil No. 97-5127 (RBK) : BAYSIDE PRISON LITIGATION : OPINION : : ___________________________________ : KUGLER, United States District Judge: Presently before the Court are two motions by all defendants (“Defendants”) for summary judgment, one against Plaintiff Jose Baez (“Baez”) and the other against Plaintiff David Kelly (“Kelly”). This lawsuit, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, stems from events alleged to have taken place at Bayside State Prison (“Bayside”) in July, August, and September of 1997. For the reasons set forth below, this Court will grant Defendants’ motion for summary judgment against Baez and dismiss their motion against Kelly, who is no longer a party to this case. I. BACKGROUND1 During July, August, and September of 1997, Bayside experienced a “lockdown” following the murder of Senior Corrections Officer Fred Baker by an inmate. The plaintiffs in this lawsuit were inmates at Bayside during this lockdown who allege that prison officials 1As the parties and this Court are intimately familiar with the factual background underlying this ten-year-old case, this Opinion will contain only a brief recitation of relevant facts. 1 Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1012 Filed 05/19/08 Page 2 of 10 PageID: <pageID> violated their civil rights during this time period. Baez alleges that officers at Bayside assaulted him on July 31, 1997. He remained incarcerated at Bayside until October 24, 1997, when he was transferred to Northern State Prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2020
    State of New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson ANNUAL REPORT 10/01/19 to 09/30/20 State of New Jersey OFFICE OF THE CORRECTIONS OMBUDSPERSON ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents Introduction 3 Historical Perspective 5 Mission, Goals, and Objectives 6 Operating Procedures 7 Corrections Ombudsperson’s Staff 8 Accomplishments 8 Goal Assessment 9 General Information and Recommendations 10 Goals and Projects 21 Inmate Contacts Aggregated to Include All Facilities 23 Inmate Contacts Disaggregated by State Prison Facilities 25 Page 2 of 50 State of New Jersey OFFICE OF THE CORRECTIONS OMBUDSPERSON ANNUAL REPORT Introduction The Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson has successfully operated for forty-eight years. Throughout the year, staff continued to assist inmates, residents, attorneys, outside agencies, and the general public with matters relating to incarcerated offenders and committed sexually violent predators. The Department of Corrections (DOC) has an obligation to ensure that all persons committed to State Correctional Facilities and Residential Community Release Programs are provided with the custody, care, training, and treatment needed to prepare them for reintegration back into the community. Oversight by an independent body is essential to ensure the integrity of the system, administrative accountability, and to protect the rights of the incarcerated. The Corrections Ombudsperson’s role has a long and honorable tradition as a means of protecting against abuse, bias, and other improper treatment or unfairness. The Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson provides a concerned medium within which “State” sentenced inmates can seek redress for concerns that arise during incarceration regarding their living conditions, treatment, or any allegations of maladministration or inaction by correctional authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson
    State of New Jersey Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson ANNUAL REPORT 10/01/19 to 09/30/20 OFFICE OF THE CORRECTIONS OMBUDSPERSON ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents Introduction 3 Historical Perspective 5 Mission, Goals, and Objectives 6 Operating Procedures 7 Corrections Ombudsperson’s Staff 8 Accomplishments 8 Goal Assessment 9 General Information and Recommendations 10 Goals and Projects 21 Inmate Contacts Aggregated to Include All Facilities 23 Inmate Contacts Disaggregated by State Prison Facilities 25 Page 2 of 50 OFFICE OF THE CORRECTIONS OMBUDSPERSON ANNUAL REPORT Introduction The Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson has successfully operated for forty-eight years. Throughout the year, staff continued to assist inmates, residents, attorneys, outside agencies, and the general public with matters relating to incarcerated offenders and committed sexually violent predators. The Department of Corrections (DOC) has an obligation to ensure that all persons committed to State Correctional Facilities and Residential Community Release Programs are provided with the custody, care, training, and treatment needed to prepare them for reintegration back into the community. Oversight by an independent body is essential to ensure the integrity of the system, administrative accountability, and to protect the rights of the incarcerated. The Corrections Ombudsperson’s role has a long and honorable tradition as a means of protecting against abuse, bias, and other improper treatment or unfairness. The Office of the Corrections Ombudsperson provides
    [Show full text]
  • Corrections FY05
    CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OVERVIEW The mission of the New Jersey Department of Corrections is to ensure Programs and Community Services that all persons committed to the State’s correctional institutions are The Division of Programs and Community Services offers an array confined with the level of custody necessary to protect the public, and of institutional and community--based programs for offenders, that they are provided with the care, discipline, training, and including community labor assistance, academic and vocational treatment needed to prepare them for reintegration into the educational programs, recreational programs, library (lending and community. law) services, and substance abuse treatment. The Division contracts with private and non--profit providers throughout the State to provide The Department’s goals and objectives are to: control costs and community--based residential treatment programs for offenders improve productivity and operational efficiency; expand treatment under community supervision. The fiscal 2005 appropriation and rehabilitation services; expand community programs and continues at $58.7 million, providing for 2,629 slots. reintegration services; improve academic and educational programs. State Parole Board The Department will accomplish these goals and objectives by: The State Parole Board’s mission is to promote the effective and maximizing the use of technology to improve service delivery and efficient assessment of inmates prior to parole, and the efficient costs; expanding inmate public service programs and outreach supervision of parolees after they have attained parole status. During efforts; evaluating and measuring program effectiveness; enhancing fiscal 2002, the Division of Parole Supervision within the emergency response capability; and expanding inmate work Department of Corrections was transferred to the State Parole Board programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Corrections
    State of New Jersey Commission on Capital Budgeting and Planning Fiscal Year 2019 Seven Year Capital Improvement Plan Philip D. Murphy, Governor Sheila Y. Oliver, Lt. Governor Brian E. Francz Executive Director B. Carol Molnar Commission Chair Office of Management and Budget April 27, 2018 This document is available via the internet at http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/omb/ Table of Contents Page Section I: Introduction Commission Members ............................................................................................................................. 1 Commission Staff ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Summary of the Fiscal 2019 State Capital Improvement Plan ................................................................ 3 Section II: Fiscal Year 2019 Recommendations by Department Summary of Capital Requests and Recommendations ............................................................................ 9 Department of Children and Families .................................................................................................... 10 Department of Corrections ..................................................................................................................... 11 Department of Environmental Protection .............................................................................................. 13 Department of Health ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Testimonies of Torture in New Jersey Prisons
    Testimonies of Torture in New Jersey Prisons EVIDENCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS A collection of testimonies from prisoners in New Jersey prisons, documenting uses of physical, chemical, and no-touch torture, among other human rights abuses. American Friends Service Committee Northeast Region Healing Justice Program Edited by: Bonnie Kerness Director, Prison Watch Program 89 Market Street, 6th floor Newark, NJ 07102 (973) 643-3192 Editorial Assistant Jessica Gonzalez Intern, Prison Watch Program Torture in New Jersey Prisons ǀ Evidence of Human Rights Violations February 2015 INTRODUCTION The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) is a Quaker faith based organization that promotes lasting peace with justice, as a practical expression of faith in action. AFSC’s interest in prison reform is strongly influenced by Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) activism addressing prison conditions as informed by the imprisonment of Friends for their beliefs and actions in the 17th and 18th centuries. AFSC has spoken out on behalf of prisoners whose voices are all too frequently silenced. Drawing on continuing spiritual insights and working with people of many backgrounds, we nurture the seeds of change and respect for human life that transform social relations and systems. For over two decades, the Prison Watch Program of the American Friends Service Committee, located in Newark, NJ, has been collecting testimonies in the form of letters from prisoners across the United States. These letters document various human rights abuses in US prisons, including, but not limited to, physical, chemical, and no-touch torture at the local, state and federal levels. It is clear that the concepts of international human rights law need to find their way into the US law enforcement, judicial and prison systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Bid Solicitation Appendix a 19Dpp00288 List and Facility Descriptions
    BID SOLICITATION APPENDIX A 19DPP00288 LIST AND FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS New Jersey State Prison – Second & Cass Street, Trenton, NJ -The maximum-security prison, located in Trenton, provides programs for adult male offenders. Work opportunities are provided by five State Use Industries shops within the prison for the production of materials and products to be used by various State agencies and local governments. Educational opportunities are comprehensive, covering adult basic education through college and including a five-cluster vocational education program. An Administration Segregation Unit inside the prison is available for housing and programming designed to treat the more severe behavioral problems which occur in the prison system. Vroom Central Reception and Assignment Facility, Sullivan Way, Trenton, NJ-The Central Reception and Assignment Facility serves as a central processing unit for all adult male offenders sentenced to the New Jersey Department of Corrections. It is responsible for objectively classifying all State inmates, and providing all intake examinations/evaluations, including medical, dental, educational, psychological, etc. The Jones Farm Minimum Security Unit is a satellite unit. It serves as a work camp for inmates serving non-violent short-term sentences. The facility supports the Central Reception and Assignment Facility in the delivery of food services, building and grounds maintenance/repairs and other activities as needed. East Jersey State Prison , US Rt. 1 @ Rahway Avenue, Woodbridge, NJ-This prison provides maximum, medium, and minimum-security programs for male adult offenders. Work opportunities are provided by five State Use Industries shops. Food service, grounds maintenance, institutional maintenance and farm services are provided by inmates at the North Jersey Developmental Center, Totowa.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New Jersey Department of Corrections
    STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ANNUAL REPORT 2007 GEORGE W. HAYMAN COMMISSIONER MESSAGE FROM COMMISSIONER GEORGE W. HAYMAN We in the New Jersey De- positive im- partment of Corrections, un- pact not only der the leadership of Gover- in the lives of nor Jon S.Corzine, remain offenders, dedicated to solidifying our but in the stature among the most effi- communities cient law enforcement agen- in which we cies in the nation. Through live and the successful implementa- work. tion of a wide array of pro- grams and initiatives, we This report is continued to make strides designed to toward that goal in the 2007 provide in- calendar year. sight into a complex sys- The ever-evolving standards tem that of recruitment and training strives to are higher than ever before, meet the assuring that today’s correc- challenges of tion officer is the best pre- modern cor- pared and most professional rectional in the history of the Depart- management. ment of Corrections. Our In order to custody staff is the last line achieve our of defense our society has objectives, I against its most dangerous will continue to rely on what I rooms and libraries, thera- criminal offenders. Yet, the consider this department’s peutic communities and of- nature of an officer’s interac- most valuable resource – the fender reentry programming. tion with an inmate can NJDOC’s outstanding work- It is highly trained officers, prove to be the difference force, more than 9,000 strong, investigators, social workers between a perpetual life of which shares my vision of a and educators committed to crime and change for the bet- proactive law enforcement making difference, both in- ter.
    [Show full text]
  • If You Have Issues Viewing Or Accessing This File Contact Us at NCJRS.Gov
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. 149255 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the officiai position or policies of the Nationai Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been grantedNew by Jersey Department of corrections to the Nationai Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. LO LO N 0) ~ INTRO DUCTION This report has been developed to provide information regarding selected offender characteristics in each correctional complex, major institution and satellite housing unit under the jurisdiction of the New Jersey Department of Corrections on December 31,1992. The selected characteristics compiled in this report are Base Offense at Admission, Total Term at Admission, Ethnicity, Age, County of Commitment, and Mandatory Minimum Terms. The Prison Complex includes the New Jersey State Prison, East Jersey State Prison, Bayside State Prison, Riverfront State Prison, Mid-State, Southern State, Northern State Prison, Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women and the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center (ADTC is a facility for adult male sex offenders). The Youth Correctional Complex consists of the Garden State Reception and Youth Correctional Facility, the Albert C. Wagner Youth Correctional FaCility, and the Mountainview Youth Correctional FaCility. The Juvenile Facilities include the New Jersey Training School for Boys, the Lloyd McCorkle Training School for Girls and the Juvenile Medium Security Facility.
    [Show full text]
  • New Jersey Department of Corrections Offender
    NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Jack Terhune, Commissioner OFFENDER CHARACTERISTICS REPORT Data Extracted - JANUARY 11, 1999 Policy Analysis and Planning Published - January 20, 2000 INTRODUCTION This report has been developed to provide information regarding offender characteristics in each correctional complex, major institution and satellite housing unit under the jurisdiction of the New Jersey Department of Corrections on January 11, 1999. The selected characteristics compiled in this report are Base Offense at Admission, Total Term at Admission, Ethnicity, Age, County of Commitment and Mandatory Minimum Terms. The Prison Complex includes the New Jersey State Prison, Central Reception and Assignment Facility, East Jersey State Prison, Bayside State Prison, Riverfront State Prison, Mid-State, Southern State , Northern State Prison, South Woods, Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women and the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center (ADTC is a facility for adult male sex offenders). The Youth Correctional Complex consists of the Garden State Youth Correctional Facility, the Albert C. Wagner Youth Correctional Facility and the Mountainview Youth Correctional Facility. “Adult Offenders in Other Facilities” include state-sentenced inmates housed in county jails, Halfway Houses, the Central Medical Unit (St. Francis Hospital) and those assigned to Electronic Monitoring/Home Confinement. “Not Coded” are records for offenders in the correctional system for whom admission characteristics data have not been entered into the computerized
    [Show full text]
  • Ship to Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 City 135 Ancora Psychiatric
    Ship To Codes Ship To Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 City 135 Ancora Psychiatric Hospital 202 Spring Garden Road Sycamore Bldg - 2nd Fl-2J Ancora 86 65 Laurel Lane Ancora Psy Hosp Ancora 65 Dr. M.L.King Ed Complex Dr M. L. King Blvd. Atlantic City 193 Adult Diagnostic & Treatment Center 8 Production Way Avenel 226 Special Treatment Unit - Annex 120 Rahway Ave Avenel 69 UMG-PCC At Hillsborough 649 Route 206N Unit 20 - 2nd Fl Belle Mead 234 Campus Program 508 Lakeland Rd (Bldg D-5) Blackwood 32 G. Woodard Gross Camden Cty. Col./Jefferson Hl. Blackwood 188 Albert C. Wagner Youth Correctional Facility Box 500 Ward Avenue Bordentown 202 Juvenile Medium Security Facil Po Box 307 Burlington St Bordentown 204 Juvenile Reception and Assessm PO Box 679 Burlington St Bordentown 205 Juvenile Female Secure Care Hayes Building PO Box 367, Burlington St Bordentown 236 D.O.V.E.S. Residential Comm Home Johnstone Campus PO Box 479 Bordentown 245 Johnstone Campus P.O. Box 307 Bordentown 186 South Woods St Prison - Facility 2 215 Burlington Rd South Mental Health Bridgeton 187 South Woods St Prison-Facility 1 (Medical) 215 Burlington Rd South Medical Bridgeton 260 South Woods State Prison - Facility 3 215 Burlington Road South Facility 3 - Medical Bridgeton 261 South Woods State Prison - ECU 1 (Medical) 215 Burlington Road South ECU 1 (Medical) Bridgeton 262 South Woods State Prison - ECU 2 (Medical) 215 Burlington Road South ECU 2 (Medical) Bridgeton 263 South Woods St Prison Min Sec Unit (Medical) 215 Burlington Road South Min Sec Unit Bridgeton 264 South Woods State Prison - Facility 2 Medical 215 Burlington Road South Facility2/Medic Bridgeton 259 South Woods State Prison - (Sharps) 215 Burlington Road South Mail Room Burlington 106 Cooper Hospital/Univ Med Ctr One Cooper Plaza Univ.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New Jersey DEPARTMENT of CORRECTIONS WHITTLESEY ROAD PO BOX 863 TRENTON NJ 08625-0863 JAMES E
    State of New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WHITTLESEY ROAD PO BOX 863 TRENTON NJ 08625-0863 JAMES E. MCGREEVEY DEVON BROWN Governor Commissioner The Honorable James E. McGreevey Governor 125 West State St. Trenton, NJ 08525 Dear Governor McGreevey: It is my privilege to present to you and the citizens of our great state the 2002 Annual Report of the New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC). The collective efforts of the NJDOC staff play a vital role in helping to ensure the safety and well being of New Jersey residents while addressing the programming needs of our offender population. But that statement alone does not tell the entire story of this department. It is hoped that the information contained in this report will provide both the public and private sectors with a heightened appreciation for the commitment demonstrated by our staff to work within the framework of available resources to achieve these objectives. The 2002 Annual Report highlights the many reasons our employees are so proud of what has been accomplished. Clearly, we are headed in the right direction. We pledge to intensify our efforts to continue to make a positive difference. On behalf of my entire staff, please know that your continued encouragement and support are greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Devon Brown Commissioner The mission of the New Jersey Department of Corrections is to ensure that all persons committed to the state correctional institutions are confined with the level of custody necessary to protect the public and are provided with the care, discipline, training and treatment needed to prepare them for reintegration into the community.
    [Show full text]